Monday, September 30, 2013

The Huffingtonpost Lets the Agenda Driven Rhetoric of an Anti-Environmentalist to Twist a Headline and a Story


It’s surprising to me that journalists will allow their thoughts—as well as their headlines and stories—to be shaped by special interests. In this case, the Huffingtonpost has a story about 100 genetically modified papaya trees being hacked down in Hawaii.
            The story identifies the act as possibly being “eco-terrorism.” As I’ve blogged before, “eco-terrorism” was a term coined by Ron Arnold, who has been an executive with the Center For the Defense of Free Enterprise for the last 30 years. He opposes environmental concerns.
            Since he first came up with the smear that puts vandals and saboteurs in the same category as the Boston Marithon bombers and Osama bin Laden, Arnold’s neologism has become part of the lexicon of the FBI, which now has a definition of domestic eco-terrorism that is loosely defined to include vandalism. This obviously pleases Arnold. In an odd sort of cyber-tautology he now cites this FBI definition on the web site of the Center For the Defense of Free Enterprise to back up his lexicographic campaign.
            I don’t really know much about the Huffingtonpost, but it should be above using this sort of agenda driven rhetoric. Some folks in the FBI would be happy to drop eco-terrorism as term that the bureau uses. No one has ever been hurt by vandals who are motivated because of an environmental agenda, and some folks have criticized law enforcement agencies, believing that using the term “domestic terrorism” will get them more funds and more attention from the press.

Saturday, September 28, 2013

From Appalachian Voices: The Fourth of the Five Worst Political Lies in Support of Mountaintop Removal

The 5 Worst Political Lies in Support of Mountaintop Removal « Appalachian Voices


The above link takes you to the fourth of Thom Kay’s Five Political Lies in Support of Mountaintop Removal. In this post he reveals the mendacity of the claims of reclamation, that the mined lands can be restored to their former ecological intactness or that the mines can give Appalachia needed flatlands. As Thom says:

One reason that claiming more flat land will lead to economic development is such an egregious lie is that the vast majority of this reclaimed land sees no economic development whatsoever. In 2010, Appalachian Voices worked with the Natural Resources Defense Council on a survey of reclaimed mine sites and discovered that, of the 410 mine surveyed, 366 (89.3%) had no form of verifiable post-mining development, excluding forestry and pasture.

Friday, September 27, 2013

From Coal Tattoo: West Virginia's Leaders Embrace Coal's Past As the EPA Tries to Limit Greenhouse Gasses

EPA carbon rules: West Virginia leaders continue to grasp for the past, rather than embracing the future


The above link takes you to Ken Ward’s Coal Tattoo and describes the absolute backwards stance taken by both Democrats and GOP politicians in West Virginia. Only retiring Senator Rockefeller made any sense in this ever warming world.

Scientists Discover That Mountaintop Removal Is Bad For Fish


One of the best things you can do in West Virginia is fish. I did some as a little boy, catching mostly bluegill in a lake not far from our home in Anmoore, West Virginia, and my uncle went often up to Elkins for some great fishing up around that area. Mountaintop removal, however, could be removing those fish from the rivers and streams of Appalachia.
            A new study[i] from the peer-reviewed journal Ecology of Freshwater Fish finds that mountaintop removal threatens the fish in the stream of Appalachia. Robert L. Hopkins, assistant professor of biology at the University of Rio Grande, and Jordan C. Roush of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, studied the effects that mountaintop mining had on six different fish species that live in different stream ecologies in eastern Kentucky. Unsurprisingly, the scientists found that populations of four of the species were negatively affected by the existence of mountaintop removal in their streams’ watershed. Perhaps surprisingly, the study found that the effect of mountaintop removal was less dependent on the overall acreage of land destroyed by mountaintop mining in a watershed and was affected more by how large the individual mining operations were.
            Effects of Mountaintop Mining on Fish Distributions in Central Appalachia has just been published, so I only have access to the abstract. I don’t even know what kinds of fish or which watersheds were included were in the study. I will update this post as I learn more.


[i] Hopkins, Robert L., and Jordan C. Roush. "Effects Of Mountaintop Mining On Fish Distributions In Central Appalachia." Ecology Of Freshwater Fish 22.4 (2013): 578-586. Environment Complete. Web. 27 Sept. 2013.

Thursday, September 26, 2013

Danger: It's More Than Obamacare on the Chopping Block For the GOP


The political blackmail that the GOP is using, that of threatening a government shutdown in order to render the new healthcare legislation toothless by defunding it, has been the headline grabbing news over the last couple of weeks and has only intensified over the last few days. But there is more to the shenanigans that the Grand Old Party is up to.
            The Republicans are now using the mechanism of raising the debt ceiling as a way to give away a wish list to big oil, King Coal, and other industries. According to the New York Times, GOP leaders sent to their rank and file a laundry list of provisions they want attached to the bill to raise the debt ceiling. Besides delaying Obamacare and limits on malpractice, the wish list includes such anti-environmental provisions as giving a green light to the construction of the Keystone pipeline, more offshore oil and gas drilling, more permitting of oil and gas exploration on federal lands, rolling back regulation on coal ash, and blocking the EPA’s new regulations on greenhouse gas production.
            Wow.
            Politically, the GOP controls the House, but that is only due to some ingenious Gerrymandering that some of the states were recently able to pull off. The party of Lincoln has failed to gain the popular vote for the presidency in five of the last six elections, and the one win for the GOP was for a sitting president, George W. Bush, who barely won. This isn’t the only time that the Republican Party has become a loser. Things were so bad for them in the seventies after Nixon’s disgrace and resignation that they considered changing the name of the party.
All these latest giveaways to business and industry that the GOP is trying to work into the debt ceiling deal are, of course, all about campaign donations and money. But what they are proposing is so extreme that I sense a crazed sort of nihilism that wants to pull in and destroy what is good and great about this country while this political party experiences what may be a death spiral.

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

From Appalachian Voices: The Third of the Five Worst Political Lies in Support of Mountaintop Removal

The 5 Worst Political Lies in Support of Mountaintop Removal « Appalachian Voices


The above link gives the third lie about mountaintop removal. The common wisdom around Appalachia say that no politician opposed to mountaintop mining can get elected in Kentucky or West Virginia.
            Well, a Catholic could never be elected president, the same was said a of black candidate. Common wisdom, as Thom Kay, Legislative Associate for Appalachian Voices, points out here is often wrong. Besides, folks in West Virginia and Kentucky don’t like mountaintop removal. It messes up the states they call home.

From Thom Kay's blog, a 2011 poll on mountaintop removal

Monday, September 16, 2013

From Appalachian Voices: The Second of the Five Political Lies in Support of Mountaintop Removal « Appalachian Voices

The 5 Worst Political Lies in Support of Mountaintop Removal « Appalachian Voices


The above link is the second installment of the Five Political Lies that industry and their politicians use in support of their mountaintop removal. Appalachian Voices Legislative Associate Thom Kay points out the obvious absurdity of this lie: Mountaintop mining has increased and the jobs have gone away.

From Thom's post from Appalachian Voices. With mountaintop removal coal production has soared and jobs have plummeted.

And where there is mountaintop removal, that's where the poor people are.

Saturday, September 14, 2013

The San Diego UT Keeps the Stupid Rhetoric of Eco-Terrorism Alive


Ten years ago folks who associated themselves with the Earth Liberation Front set afire a construction site here in San Diego. It was a big, big fire. The building was to be a five-story condominium complex. In the past decade no one has been indicted for this crime.
            In covering the anniversary, our local paper, the UT, continues to call this act of arson eco-terrorism. This was a horribly stupid, and wasteful crime, but it does not compare to exploding pressure cookers on the streets of Boston or radicals flying jet airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
            I get so tired of stupid rhetoric.

The Wall Street Journal: Global Warming, What Me Worry?


What is it with the Wall Street Journal? I understand the business and financial emphasis of the newspaper; I understand that a lot of that business concerns the fossil fuel industry. So I understand that the editorial page needs to support the fossil fuel industry. But it really sent my head spinning when I read this editorial: Dialing Back the Alarm on Climate Change. While celebrating the finding in the soon to be released IPCC report that anticipates a lower rate of global warming than what previous reports found, the author contends that a moderate increase in global temperatures would be a good thing.
            While it seems that northern countries like Russia could capitalize on warmer and longer summers to grow more food, for the most part most of what I read about global warming is pretty nasty. We are just beginning to get the enormity of the ecological ramifications of climate change. Most of the experts in this area try to be conservative in their estimates, but they are nonetheless predicting substantial ecological damage, such as greatly accelerated pace of extinctions.[i] A lot of folks are talking about such drastic measures as assisted migrations.[ii]
            The world is starting to experience the wanderings of climate refugeesAnd that says nothing of the instability, suffering, and warfare that will happen because of a warmer world and rising seas. Maybe the author should have read the Christian Science Monitor and this article on the possible link between global warming and the war in Syria.
            If this editorial wasn’t enough, the Journal also published this opinion piece in which a number of scientists say that climate change is nothing to worry over.
            Extinctions? Droughts? Refugees? Warfare? Nothing to worry over?
            Does anybody take the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal seriously?



[i] GREGORY SHUFELDT, et al. "Expert Opinion On Climate Change And Threats To Biodiversity." Bioscience 63.8 (2013): 666-673. Environment Complete. Web. 14 Sept. 2013.
[ii] C. Ste-Marie, et al. "Why We Disagree About Assisted Migration: Ethical Implications Of A Key Debate Regarding The Future Of Canada's Forests." Forestry Chronicle 87.6 (2011): 755-765. Environment Complete. Web. 14 Sept. 2013.

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Calculating the Enormous Environmental Costs of Mountaintop Removal


Over the last half dozen years or so research has been revealing what the folks of Appalachia have known for decades, that mountaintop removal is a bad thing. While previous scientific studies of MTR have concentrated on specific environmental impairments to streams or nearby ecosystems, a group of scientists have now calculated the total environmental costs of mountaintop removal, and it’s as ugly as any valley fill.
            Using satellite images and county-by-county records of coal production, the scientists examined mountaintop mining from 1985 to 2005. Appalachian coal produced during that 20-year period totaled 1.93 billion tons. That equals about two years’ worth of current domestic coal demand. To mine that coal about 770 square miles were converted from mountains and forest to mountaintop mine sites like the one pictured below.

 
Just one of the more than 500 mountaintop removal mines in Appalachia

770 square miles is the about the same area as the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. From the paper’s abstract:

To meet current US coal demands, an area the size of Washington DC would need to be mined every 81 days. A one-year supply of coal would result in ~2,300 km of stream impairment and a loss of ecosystem carbon sequestration capacity comparable to the global warming potential of >33,000 US homes. For the first time, the environmental impacts of surface coal mining can be directly scaled with coal production rates.

OK, if the enormity of that doesn’t’ knock you out of your boots, the scientists have some other numbers. One of the scientists who worked on this study, Emily S. Bernhardt, says the carbon sequestration lost when forests are wiped out to make way for mountaintop mines is extremely long-term. The associate professor of biogeochemistry at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment said:

“Based on the average carbon sequestration potential of formerly forested mine sites that have been reclaimed into predominantly grassland ecosystems, we calculate it would take around 5,000 years for any given hectare of reclaimed mine land to capture the same amount of carbon that is released when the coal extracted from it is burned for energy.”

Brian D. Lutz, who is an Assistant Professor of Biochemistry at Kent State University and who began the analysis for this study while he was a postdoctoral research associate at Duke last year, adds that “Even on those rare former surface mines where forest regrowth is achieved, it would still take about 2,150 years for the carbon sequestration deficit to be erased.”
            The scientists found that great areas of the Appalachians were destroyed for sometimes paltry amounts of coal. Their data suggests that some mines were instigated to dig up coal seams that were only about one meter in thickness. Including the valley fills and other adjacent disturbance to the land, they calculated that the area disturbed by a mountaintop removal mine exceeds by 50 percent the spatial extent of the underlying coal.
            Working with Lutz and Bernhardt was William H. Schlesinger. He is a biochemist and President of the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies an independent not-for-profit environmental research organization in Millbrook, New York. The study was published today in the online peer reviewed journal PLOS ONE.  No external funding financed the study.

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

From Appalachian Voices: The First of the Five Great Political Lies in Support of Mountaintop Removal

The 5 Worst Political Lies in Support of Mountaintop Removal « Appalachian Voices


The above link is from Thom Kay of Appalachian Voices. He discusses some of the distorted rhetoric of the coal industry and the politicians who support mountaintop mining. Today’s word is “balance.”

Your Food in the Future: Faster and Filthier


Under a test program that has been in effect for 15 years, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has allowed five meat processing plants to increase the speed of their processing lines by as much as 20 percent and allowed them to replace USDA meat inspectors with private inspectors hired by the slaughterhouses.
            Needless to say, the results were along the lines of a fox guarding the henhouse disaster. A long overdue report on the program found that three of the plants in the program were among the 10 worst meat processing plants in the country and the plant with the worst failing grade by far was one that is in this pilot program.
            As I said earlier, this report is long overdue. The USDA promised to study the performance of the program but never did so. That’s right, they allowed the pilot program to go forward but never looked into it. In the 15 years since the beginning of the program the USDA collected no data on the slaughterhouses in the program.
            I don’t imagine that the conditions of the plants approached what Sinclair Lewis found when he entered Chicago’s slaughterhouses to perform research for his book The Jungle, but among the safety and health violations that were found at the plants was meat contaminated with partially digested food and fecal matter.
            The Government Accountability Office looked into the matter and issued a separate report, saying that it did not recommend that the pilot program be extended to other slaughterhouses. The GAO found that, with only five plants allowed to try out the faster processing, the program was too small to “provide reasonable assurance that any conclusions can apply more broadly to the universe of 608 hog plants in the United States.”
Business liked the pilot program because of increased profits and less government oversight. The meat packing industry is also behind the crop of new legislation in several states that are commonly referred to as ag-gag laws. These laws make it illegal for folks to go undercover to find and report on animal cruelty or unhealthful and dangerous conditions within slaughterhouses and meat packing facilities. The laws also severely restrict the ability of whistleblowers to report violations.
So OK, the USDA found increased health and safety violations at the plants in this program, and the GAO doesn’t recommend it either. But they still plan to expand the program to other pork plants nationwide and allow a similar program to be used in all chicken and turkey plants nationwide.
I don’t know if I should feel more outraged or nauseated.

Sunday, September 8, 2013

The World Warms As Australia's New Government Promises to Drop National Carbon Tax


For global warming there are two competing truisms. The first truism is that the most efficient and effective means of reducing carbon emissions is through a carbon tax. The basic economic rule is that people buy less of something when it’s more expensive. And a tax on carbon would make all things reliant on carbon emissions—gasoline, electricity, etc.—more expensive. Folks would buy less of this stuff and there would be less carbon thrown into the air.
            The most common approach around carbon taxes is levying them on industries that are heavy users of fossil fuels, mostly the electric utilities, with the increased costs passed on to consumers. These taxes can be finessed, with rebates going to lower income individuals to mitigate their hardship from these taxes. A good thing about a carbon tax is that the revenue can be used to promote cleaner and greener energy options.
            The other truism is that people hate to pay taxes. It doesn’t matter what sort of tax it might be, an income tax, a carbon tax, a sales, tax, folks hate to pay taxes.
            We just saw the clash of these truisms play themselves out in Australia, where the recent elections delivered a whopping blow to the Labor Party that had been in power for the past six years. The new Prime Minister-elect, Tony Abbott, proclaimed in his acceptance speech that one of his prime objectives once he is in office is an end to Australia’s carbon tax.
            Down under the carbon tax has not been around a long time, only about a year. In its short life it proved to be, as with all taxes, unpopular. It was one of the issues that Abbott used to hammer the Labor Party in his campaigning.
            This was not a single-issue election. The Labor Party might have been voted out anyway. In power, the Labor Party was unstable and prone to internal bickering, although their popularity increased when Kevin Rudd, who had been Prime Minister from 2007 to 2010, replaced Prime Minister Julia Gillard in something of an internal party coup in the past few months.
            The death of Australia’s carbon tax is nonetheless disconcerting. The planet, and humanity, will be in a lot better shape if human beings reduce their use of fossil fuels, but we’re not going to magically do that sort of thing without being prodded to do so. Despite the good that a carbon tax might be able to do for us, we just don’t like being prodded.

Friday, September 6, 2013

A Chemical Spill Turns a West Virginia River Milky White


West Virginia is famous for whitewater. Folks come from all over to ride the rapids of the New River and other great rivers of the Mountain State. Whitewater is a good thing, when the river is naturally given over to rapids. But a river up in Boone County suddenly and unexpectedly had its waters running white from a chemical spill today.
            The spill is from Patriot Coal, and the substance that blanched the river is DT-50-D, a chemical sprayed on coal cars to inhibit the spread of coal dust. The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection says the substance is not toxic, but people should not swim in the river or drink its milky water. Not toxic but don't drink it. That sort of talk reminds me of Fukushima—or dozens of other spills for that matter—when officials said that the radiation—or other toxins—were not at high levels and not to be a concern.
            Somehow their assurances don't make my worries go away.

Tuesday, September 3, 2013

The Coal Industry Teaches the Teachers In Texas


In Texas the coal industry has a program to ensure that their agenda makes it to the classrooms of the Lone Star State. The industry sponsors “Coal Camp,” five days of workshops for Texas schoolteachers in which the coal industry schools the schoolteachers on the industry's message.
            What’s in it for the teachers? They can get credit to renew their teaching certificates. And the workshops are paid for—to the tune of about $100,000 a year— by the coal industry. The teachers pay nothing for coal camp.
In Appalachia they are far more direct with their message, going right to the classrooms and schoolchildren. But the effort of this program in Texas is probably the same, getting the next generation to accept the methods of extraction used by the industry to get coal out of the ground and into the power plants.
Any industry has the right to promote its business, but taking business, any business not just coal, into the classroom is wrong. After the three R’s, schools are to teach history, the sciences, and give kids a notion of critical thinking skills. The children will have plenty of time during their lives to absorb the promotion of the coal industry through their normal PR campaigns and their advertising, and all the coal companies are welcome to come into the schools on career day to attract the workers that they might need in the mines and in their offices. But the coal companies should leave the schoolchildren of Texas alone to do their math problems and learn their grammar.

Monday, September 2, 2013

Global Warming Brings Us a 1950s Sci-Fi World


When I was a kid I spent a lot of time watching old science fiction movies on TV. The plots varied some, but the movies always had a reasonable scientist who properly performed his research and warned of coming disaster, lest the world continue in its foolhardy practices. The movies always had beautiful and vulnerable young women. And, of course, there were always the world-threatening cataclysms—like giant grasshoppers or giant bunny rabbits that killed, destroyed, and threatened all of civilization—that came to fruition because the world did not heed the warnings of the reasonable scientist. And there was always the brave hero who, on the advice of the reasonable scientist, took some bold action to kill off the giant critters and ensure civilization its survival while the beautiful and vulnerable young woman fell in love with him.
            Maybe all that time in front of the television wasn’t wasted, and it actually prepared me for life in the twenty-first century and the science fiction headlines that are becoming common due to climate change.
            In the Guardian today, two stories tell us about the science fiction world we now live in. We learn that the folks in the Marshall Islands, a country comprising a group of Pacific atolls between Hawaii and Australia, are seriously concerned that their entire nation could become uninhabitable in the next 30 to 60 years. The islands are only an average of about six feet above sea level, and the rising ocean threatens increased occurances of flooding as well as increasing the salinity of their groundwater supplies.
            Even for places that are high and dry global warming threatens crops, health, and living standards. Hundreds of agricultural pests that have been confined to the warmer parts of the world are moving north and south at a rate of almost two miles per year. That is the conclusion drawn by British scientists who studied data that has been collected for the last 50 years on over 500 tropical pests. As these pests advance into temperate climates, it could increase the costs of food or even lead to serious shortages.
            Reasonable scientists have been warning us about these kinds of climate change scenarios, but I’m afraid that there won’t be any brave heroes to save the world this time.

Nobody listens to the reasonable scientist and the giant grasshoppers attack the Wrigley Building in Chicago. Maybe the sugar in the gum attracts them.  From  Beginning of the End, AB-PT Pictures Corp. 1957

Sunday, September 1, 2013

More Research Finds That Fracking Contaminates Groundwater


A recent study has found that in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania the closer you live to where there is fracking the more likely your water well will be contaminated with methane.
            The study was performed by Robert Jackson, a chemical engineer from Duke University. He found that home wells that were less than a mile from a fracking operation had methane concentrations that were six times higher than concentrations of wells that were farther away. He found methane in 115 of 141 residential water wells he examined.
            It is believed that the wells are contaminated when the protective metal casings and concrete around a frack well leak. Isotopes and traces of ethane characteristic of the natural gas found in the Marcellus Shale distinguish the gas found in the well water from methane that might have been produced by microorganisms in the groundwater.
            There is also the possibility that the fracking actually opens up pathways for the natural gas to seep up and contaminate the groundwater. A fracking expert from Cornell University, Anthony Ingraffea, is in the process of examining inspection reports from most of the more than 41,000 gas wells that have been drilled in Pennsylvania since the beginning of 2000. So far it looks like his research reveals that a higher percentage of fracking wells are leaking than conventional oil and gas wells drilled into other formations besides the Marcellus Shale.
            With these new findings, I wonder if there will be any Pennsylvania lawmakers who might say, “Hey, we better investigate this a little more before we let even more fracking in our commonwealth.”